Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Confused Why Some Seem to Think We Got Fleeced


Daddy_Uncle
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

i'm talking about the long term outlook for the drafted QB's success, which looks beyond merely this year's FA crop. I'd agree there is no immediate upgrade to DJ, but that does not mean quality FA WR's won't be available in the next couple of years.

I don't think anyone could reasonably expect whoever we draft to lead us to immediate SB glory next year, so thinking in terms of the next few years seems valid. in that regard, i'm concerned that we just gave away a substantial chunk of our assets that could help put offensive weapons in place, but acknowledging that there are still avenues to doing so. it's just that the margin for error got smaller. Miss on a FA next year, or first round WR the year after, and the risk you leave the QB you traded up to get with poor offensive weapons gets a lot bigger a lot faster.

There’s plenty of picks left. The problem is not one of them matters if the first one is the wrong one. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Carl Spackler said:

Paying whatever you have to pay to swing for the fences never fails. Look at Coach of the Year Matt Rhule. 

By the way, I haven’t seen anyone advocating for signing a vet retread again. 

How the fug could you say Rhule swung for the fences!?!?

He literally tried to keep it in the park by trying to pick up retreads.

You need to stop! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Carl Spackler said:

Paying whatever you have to pay to swing for the fences never fails. Look at Coach of the Year Matt Rhule. 

By the way, I haven’t seen anyone advocating for signing a vet retread again. 

Did I say it never fails? But it’s easily the best option over staying at 9 or signing a retread. 
 

And by the way, you haven’t seen anyone advocating for signing a retread? You must’ve missed the 42 different threads about Derek Carr. I’ve even seen folks on here say we should run it back with Darnold. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

I would be extremely surprised if it’s Levis at 1. If we trade back down to 3 (don’t see this happening) then Levis is a real option.

That in itself means Reich and his coaching staff already failed and need to be fired. Trading your best player and future picks for the right to trade down and land Tim Couch is a sub-Rhulean move. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Carl Spackler said:

Not necessarily. If it’s not Stroud or Young you can stop worrying about winning for the next 10 years. 

i'm comfortable saying that not even Stroud or Young is any kind of guarantee. The reality is we just traded up to give ourselves better odds of filling the most important position by far with talent. 

Not guaranteed success. 

Better odds. 

How much better is really anyone's guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, travisura said:

Did I say it never fails? But it’s easily the best option over staying at 9 or signing a retread. 
 

And by the way, you haven’t seen anyone advocating for signing a retread? You must’ve missed the 42 different threads about Derek Carr. I’ve even seen folks on here say we should run it back with Darnold. 

I didn’t pay hardly any attention to the Carr threads, because it was never going to happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Varking said:

There are folks who believe DJ Moore isn’t a true #1. If they are correct then we haven’t had a true #1 since prime Steve Smith. Maybe finding receivers is easier than finding a QB but for our organization we’ve sucked at finding both. 
 

A first, two seconds, and a player worthy of additional firsts or seconds is a fair trade to move up 8 spots. 

Teams have proven you don't need a #1 receiver to win a superbowl

You do need a game changing franchise quarterback though.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

we didn't.  According to the formulas and some interpretations of value (jeez) we actually came out on top by an estimated early third rounder.  (See the other thread about Quantitative analysis...)

I suspect the reason we didn't have to pay through the nose to move up is twofold:

1. Chicago was in the unusual position of having the first pick while having recently drafted a qb prospect they still have some confidence in.

2. The league wide consensus view is none of the QB prospects in this draft project as perennial pro bowlers. There's just not the excitement over them as a group or any one of them as an individual that creates a bidding war for that top pick.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yeah okay. We as an organization have been more patient with him than many. And there has been a small parade of guys drafted since he was, also to bad teams, that have passed him. Some have lapped him. As a fan I am out of patience but he gets this year it is out of my hands always has been. I just hope the bar is higher than it has been for him.    FWIW, XL dropped two passes last year. He did do some other bad stuff, just saying. 
    • Except it takes those QB's a few years to develop because they needed to learn the mental side of the game and have it catch up to their physical attributes. Bryce was supposed to be a QB savant who already had a fully developed mental side of the game and that was going to make up for his lack of physical ability.  And his lack of NFL level QB physical traits has been clear as day to anyone who has watched him the last 3 years, mainly, he just doesn't have an NFL arm, he can't zip the ball into tight spaces or throw on a line down the field like is needed at this level.
    • Don’t recall seeing many of his interviews but what strikes me is that he engages and goes in depth. Even with the cliche answers as referenced by OP come across somewhat thoughtful.  Very likable personality despite being someone who can crush an average person like I can crush a paper cup. I knew Motons mother had a career at MSU but was looking on the google and found that Mushin Muhammad personally knew Motons grandfather.   His late grandfather was a professor at MSU.   Cool guy.  Interesting family and small world.      
×
×
  • Create New...